Employees are entitled to benefits even after acquittal from criminal charges; undue delay in disbursement of financial entitlements is unlawful.

JUDGMENT

S. Talapatra, J. - Heard Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 and Mr. P.K. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4.

2. This writ petition is the sequel of the previous writ petitions. The petitioner had filed the first writ petition being WP(C) No. 1347 of 2016 challenging the departmental proceeding which was drawn up by the memorandum dated 04.12.2020 [Annexure-P/4 to that writ petition] on a series of imputations and misconduct, spread over in these articles of charge. This court having observed that the said departmental proceeding is absolutely without authority and illegal and cannot stand the scrutiny of law, inasmuch as the Principal Secretary, General Administration (Administrative Reforms) Department, Government of Tripura did not have any authority and control over the petitioner who had been an employee of Tripura Rehabilitation Plantation Corporation Ltd., for short TRPC Ltd. (the respondent No. 2 herein).

3. In that proceeding, the counsel for the corporation had submitted that pension of the petitioner cannot be released under the Form 10D and Form 19 unless those are forwarded to the EPF Commissioner. Accordingly, the Corporation respondents had contended that the petitioner might be advised to submit the claim form through his formal employer to derive both the benefits under the EPF and MPF Act, 1952 and also other benefits from the TRPC Ltd.

4. It was directed to release the financial benefits including pension to the petitioner as per entitlement within three months. Even though, the said judgment was not challenged by the respondents, but they did not pay any financial benefit as at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was defending himself against the criminal prosecution being GR Case No. 334 of 2009 under Section 409 IPC.

5. The petitioner, as a matter of fact, was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kailashahar, Unakoti Judicial District in the said case and later on, the said judgment was reversed by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19.12.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 04(02) of 2019. As a result, the petitioner was relieved of the scourge of the judgment of conviction.

6. It may be noted that the judgment of the Sessions Judge, whereby the petitioner was acquitted from the charge under Section 409 IPC was challenged by the State by an appeal under Section 378 (3) of the CrPC being Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 2020. The said appeal was dismissed by the judgment dated 02.12.2021.

7. Today, Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed a copy of that order before this court. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to pension under the scheme of the TRPC Ltd. which had been introduced in collaboration with the Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd., LICI, for short (the respondent No. 4 herein).

8. As the petitioner did not get any benefits in terms of the judgment dated 21.12.2017, he had filed another writ petition being WP(C) 24/2019. By the order dated 08.04.2019 the following direction was issued by this court:

'I direct the respondents to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioner keeping in mind the judgment dated 21.12.2017 passed in WP(C) No. 1347 of 2016, in accordance with the existing law prevalent in the TRPC Ltd., within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.'

But no positive result yielded.

9. On 29.06.2019, the petitioner received a communication (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) disposing his representations dated 12.10.2018, 18.08.2018